Registered user login:

The Pope's plot

Agnès Poirier

Published 18 September 2008

To speak of positive secularism is to imply that there are two kinds of secularism, one good, the other bad

The Pope has been in France, being given the red-carpet treatment during a three-day state visit that took him from Paris to Lourdes. The Pope was visiting "the eldest daughter of the Catholic Church", as France is known to the Vatican. It is quite an event when a pope so attached to the traditionalist wing of the Church meets a French president so little attached to the principle of secularism.

In December last year, when Nicolas Sarkozy visited the Pope at the Vatican (flanked by Carla Bruni's mother, his putative future mother-in-law, and Jean-Marie Bigard, a stand-up comedian better known in France for his salacious jokes and his denial of the 9/11 bombings than for his piety), the president seized the opportunity to develop a new idea that he called "positive secularism".

This past week, in Paris, Sarkozy did it again: advocating, in front of the evidently delighted Pope, the benefits of a secularism "more open to religions". In his speech, Benedict XVI blessed Sarkozy's idea, making himself an actor in the current French debate. Concerning the relations between the French state and the Church, he declared: "I pay tribute to your expression of positive secularism. Indeed, there still remain many open areas of discussion which we must deal with and resolve with determination and patience. I'm convinced that we need to reflect on the true meaning and importance of secularism anew."

Last year, while the French were still getting to grips with their new president, his first call for positive secularism was cautiously welcomed by the majority. With the second, many are wondering aloud: "Since when was the secularism born of the Revolution negative?"

To speak of positive secularism is to imply that there are two kinds of secularism, one good, the other bad. The supposedly good one, put forward by the Pope and his acolyte Nicolas Sar kozy, is a secularism that would allow politics to mingle with religions. One which would, for instance, turn a blind eye to sects and their actions, one which would accept that people be treated differently according to their faiths, one which would blur the frontiers between the public and private spheres. Sarkozy certainly knows a great deal about the blurring of the two distinct worlds whose separation has been France's trademark for at least two centuries.

Positive secularism would thus emerge to correct secularism as France has always known it, which the French must apparently now think of as negative: too rigorous, too restrictive, too extreme, a secularism that forces assimilation of a heterogeneous population rather than trying to create a tapestry rich with difference.

What the Pope and president pretend not to know is that there is no positive or negative secularism (laïcité in French). Secularism is neutral. It is neither a dogma nor a doctrine. If anything, it's an abstention. Secularism abstains from fav ouring one religion over another, or favouring atheism over religious belief. It is a political principle that aims at guaranteeing the largest possible coexistence of various freedoms.

From a strictly legal perspective, secularism is extremely positive: it creates a universal freedom to believe or not to believe, and protects individuals from any public interference in their belief, provided that their belief or lack of it does not disturb the peace. As the philosopher Catherine Kintzler wrote in the French weekly Marianne: unlike religion, secularism creates freedom. What religion has ever recognised the rights to believe and not to believe? What religion has promoted the physical emancipation of women? What religion accepts what believers would deem to be blasphemous words?

Instead of speaking of positive secularism, President Sarkozy would have done better to demand in the name of secularism that religions such as Catholicism be less exclusive in their political, intellectual and legal views - or, in other words, more positive.

According to the political scientist Caroline Fourest, author of a recent book on the Catholic Church, the sympathy between the Pope and the French president shouldn't be surprising. Their "new idea" is a Trojan horse. The term "positive secularism" was actually coined in 2005 by the then Cardinal Ratzinger, whose views have inspired two of President Sarkozy's close aides and speechwriters, the practising Catholic Emmanuelle Mignon and the Dominican friar Philippe Verdin.

So what we have witnessed is Nicolas Sarkozy pretending to have an idea that originated at the Vatican, while the Pope, its delighted author, sits back and waits for the president to implement "his" idea. A few days ago, in an interview with the Catholic French daily La Croix, Benedict's private secretary clearly stated that the Holy Father expected the president of France to diligently transform this idea into acts. Machiavelli would be impressed.

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

9 comments from readers

nawawimohamad
18 September 2008 at 11:05

Sarkozy is a politician and he will always play politics in whatever he does. The Pope representing religion is just trying to accomodate the politics. Nothing more, nothing less.

newsreader60
18 September 2008 at 20:21

Secularism, as any other ‘ism,’ is a system of thought. It is implying the faith (since it never has been proven) that it supercedes all religions. By doing so, it becomes the new faith promoted by the state, the new state religion. The difference between this new faith and religion and other faiths and religion is that it is not based on religious/mystical experience, but on political considerations.

The secularism the Pope is arguing for is such that it does not want to supercede anything, but allow religions to function within the state as religions, both in the public and private space in society.

How can Secularism, as we know it in France, limit religious life in the name of freedom? What kind of freedom is that?

DavidPollock
19 September 2008 at 12:20

In France, the government owns and maintains all churches built before 1905 and priests get municipal housing - privileges worth €150 mn a year. Their secularism needs reinforcement, not weakening.

Pierre
20 September 2008 at 03:01

The Pope is the Worlds best known cross dresser.

Any objective study of the Catholic Church's history will confirm the irrefutable fact that the Church's history make the Nazis appear angelic.

Douglas Chalmers
20 September 2008 at 06:14

"Their "new idea" is a Trojan horse..."

Two frauds babbling on together - both Neocons and both pro-nuclear, uhh. Whether it is to be called a "Christian" empire or a "Neocon" empire, that is what they are working towards. Most probably, though, it will be simply known as the new "NATO".....

gino
21 September 2008 at 11:53

douglas chambers bet ure the long lost son of ian paisley and madge thacher

deano1700
21 September 2008 at 17:03

What religion has ever recognised the rights to believe and not to believe? What religion has promoted the physical emancipation of women? What religion accepts what believers would deem to be blasphemous words? These questions were posed in the article. As a secular humanist I find that the Unitarian 'church' allows all these.

deano1700
21 September 2008 at 17:08

Questions in the article.

What religion has ever recognised the rights to believe and not to believe? What religion has promoted the physical emancipation of women? What religion accepts what believers would deem to be blasphemous words?

Answer. UNITARIANISM I am a secular humanist and find this church tolerant of all viewpoints.

Roland Baker
21 September 2008 at 17:16

Mme Poirier Bonjour: Carla Bruni and Nicolas Sarkozy were marrried on 2 February 2008 at the Elysée Palace before the Mayor of the 8th Arrondissement, François Lebel, as confirmed by Place Beauvau and the Elysée. Carla Bruni's mother may have been his putative "belle mère" in December 2007, but she is the "real deal" now. It was Nicolas Sarkozy's third marriage. L'Express referred to his dissolved marriage to Cécilia Sarkozy as "passionel".

I adhere to no religion now as I support Richard Dawkins. However, I was baptised and confirmed in the Anglican Communion as a child. I learned that marriage is a sacrament and is a union, between a man and a woman, ordained for the procreation of children. It lasts for life until one party dies. Leaving aside Anglican differences with the Catholics on literal transubstantiation, the Catholic view of marriage is the same as far as I am aware - indeed they are even hotter on the 'procreation of children' aspect.

How does having three marriages, albeit not at the same time, and one of them "stormy", qualify the President of France to argue for a greater inter-connection between Church and State. Does he learn anything from the problems that such intermingling has caused in the Republic of Ireland over the years?

Sarkozy was at Place Beauvau, indeed he was Place Beauvau, before he entered the Elysee. This role was held during the Presidential Election campaign by François Baroin. France will abandon its traditions of secular liberty, equality and fraternity at its peril. It is not the response required to the Gare du Nord. It will not ease tensions in the Banlieues.

Depending on who emerges from Reims as the First Secretary of the Parti Socialiste, Sarkozy has opened a new front in the battle for the secular republic that could be his undoing.

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before your comment is displayed on the website

You may enter up to 2000 characters (about 300-350 words)

Characters left:

We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.

Read More

Vote!

Should Darling have been bolder with the 45% tax rate?